Twist 4 No. 12 wires together???
Joel
so I can make 20 amp circuits. I have a spot where 4 No. 12 gauge
wires come together. What is the best way to bind together 4 No. 12
wires? Is there a wire nut big enough so I can twist them together?
The largest I have seen is Max 3 No. 12. Is there another way I should
use to connect them? I have tried twisting 4 scrap pieces together and
it really is hard to get them twisted together.
Greg
about 1/2". They do make wirenuts bigger than the red one. I see 4 #12s under a
red one all the time but I think you want a blue one
Ryan Evans
line up.
Grab the ends with a set of lineman's pliers and twist them together. Snip
the ends
to the correct length, with a slight taper if necessary.
A red wire nut should now work fine.
RE
Bob Weiss
Bob Weiss
> I have a novice question. I am wiring my basement with 12 Gauge wire
> so I can make 20 amp circuits. I have a spot where 4 No. 12 gauge
> wires come together. What is the best way to bind together 4 No. 12
> wires? Is there a wire nut big enough so I can twist them together?
Yep. A blue wirenut is the next size up from red, usually.
Pretwist the wires with lineman's pliers before applying the wirenut.
Bob Weiss N2IXK
Ben Miller
news:565f796.03121...@posting.google.com...
Do not exceed the rated capacity of the wire nuts. There are some that will
handle four #12. As an option, make a jumper wire a few inches long. Put two
wires plus jumper on one wire nut (3 wires total). Put the remaining two
wires plus the other end of the jumper on a second wire nut.
Ben Miller
--
Benjamin D. Miller, PE
B. MILLER ENGINEERING
www.bmillerengineering.com
SPAM>@verizon.net Nukie Poo
"Ben Miller" <benm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:AcvDb.402920$ao4.1328132@attbi_s51...
Or even better, use a Wago "Wall Nut" or an Ideal "In Sure" connector. You
connect up to six 12 AWG conductors with them. These are far superior to
the ancient devices known as "wirenuts". When will we Americans let go of
such an ancient technology.
Greg
>such an ancient technology.
>
It will happen when the NFPA gets evidence of a body count caused by this or
any other wiring method. In the mean time the proposals for the 2008 code will
open up next summer. The form is in the back of the NEC or you can get it on
the web at the NFPA site www.nfpa.org. Collect a list of the failures and go
for it.
bob peterson
I am not a huge fan of wirenuts because most of my electrical
experience is with industrial work where the vibrations are a problem
with wirenuts, but for home use they are fine.
indago
In the 3M Wirenut group, the grey wirenut is the next larger one after the
red, then the blue. 4 #12 wires should go into a red one OK, but a grey
wirenut would easily handle the four.
Tom Horne
> connect up to six 12 AWG conductors with them. These are far superior to
> the ancient devices known as "wirenuts". When will we Americans let go of
> such an ancient technology.
Do you have a link to either of those devices?
--
Tom H
Michael
I looked these things up (Wago "Wall Nut" or an Ideal "In Sure") -
wow! So simple and elegant (I've never heard of them before)!!!
The only question I have: aren't these connectors more bulky than wire
nuts? Sometimes there is not too much room in the box...
volts500
"Michael" <mkoga...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e6d8a8db.03121...@posting.google.com...
The company that I work for used them on a trial basis (two boxes of 5000
count, yellows) on a fairly large commercial job last summer (lighting
only). As far as ease and quickness of installation, they are _definitely_
the monkey's nut. As far as bulkiness, the "In Sure" connectors allow one
to fold the wires into the box much easier than when using a regular wirenut
because the connector allows the wires to twist as they are folded into the
box. The question is, when is the price going to be competitive with
wirenuts? Of course, only time will tell if the "In Sure" or similar
connectors provide dependable connections (over a number of years, not just
the warranty period.)
Greg
>wirenuts? Of course, only time will tell if the "In Sure" or similar
>connectors provide dependable connections
Isn't this the same technology used in the much maligned "back stabbing" wiring
devices? It doesn't look more secure than a wirenut, just faster.
Al
"volts500" <volt...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
Interesting gadgets. What makes the electrical connection? Is it a knife
edge that digs into the wire? What is the electrical resistance per
contact? Although wire nuts are difficult to use sometimes, the twisting
of the wires together with the conductor within wire nut make for
multiple connections. Although I haven't measured the resistance,
intuitively I think it would be lower. Comments?
Al
--
There's never enough time to do it right the first time.......
Ben Miller
news:no.spam-95A994...@news.verizon.net...
> contact? Although wire nuts are difficult to use sometimes, the twisting
> of the wires together with the conductor within wire nut make for
> multiple connections. Although I haven't measured the resistance,
> intuitively I think it would be lower. Comments?
I tend to agree, although I don't have any hard data. The real test is not
initial resistance, but deterioration due to atmospheric exposure, thermal
cycling, oxidation, etc. over time. This is what got aluminum wire into
trouble. Wire nuts may not be the ultimate, but the name brand ones, when
properly applied, generally tend to do quite well in this regard.
Hobdbcgv
Being as how I had tested some of the first wire-nuts for approval for the
military (back when they were introduced and before they were widely used in
residential and commercial work) I was interested in knowing why most posters
recommended twisting the wires before they put on the wire nut.
Basically, I wondered where they got that information?
Not that it isn't proper practice nowadays to use that process with the
various types of wire nut designs and all would pass UL. I ask out of
curiosity because in our tests by twisting first and then applying the nut,
back then about half failed the capacity test, while laying straight wires and
turning them with the nut had no failures. In fact, the instructions were
quite specific about NOT twisting first.
Theory (verified by inspection of a proper sample size) was that the
truncated cone shape of the screw would create a lot of pressure on the wires
and that pressure was used with the mechanical smearing of the crossing wires
so as to flatten and "weld" the copper. If the wires were twisted first, the
pressure couldn't smear the circumference of the wires-in-contact in order to
broaden the surface-in-contact. They would just be captured.
The twisting was merely a side effect of the
mechanical-smearing-under-pressure mechanism, and not necessarily something
desirable in itself
In other words, all that the pre-twisted wires ever did were lay under a
greater pressure than without the nut (with a little smearing at the ends)
while the parallel wires twisted by the nut saw the very high pressure from the
screw- effect "going up the bundle" and they smeared to a larger contact
surface area and welded all along the wires under the nut rather than just the
tip - the weld went up the bundle until the pressure from the force from the
turning was below that needed to smear and weld the metal .
(We turned some just a bit, and then backed off the nut and checked. Did it
again and again with several numbers of turns to verify the welding)
Because a cylindrical pair-triangle-quadrangle was put into a cone, there was
nearly point contact along the narrow ring where they met and thus very high
pressure. So as the bundle was smeared along the cone and forced into the cone
shape alnong the outside, the wires in contact were being squeezed onto each
other as they were turned across their long axis by the twisting of the long
axis, in effect welding the soft copper in contact to a depth into the wire
proportional to the pressure at that area. The screw didn't just apply its
pressure all along the wire bundle at once, but the pressure moved up the
bundle as the twist just ahead of the nut twisting-under-the-nut-pressure-area
turned the wires at the point of max force. You ended up with maximum
deformation of the copper and thus maximum surface area in contact
The spring-core type gave a wider range of deflection with the same pressure
as the screw types, but less pressure.
So I assume UL has changed their requirement (from the old informal
approval process?) that wire nuts had to be applied to parallel wires to meet
the requirement.
Anyone familair with the approved source of the "twist -first" method, and/or
what UL requires as to approved application, and what UL used in their formal
testing procedure - twisted or parallel?
just curious
User 1.nospam
"Hobdbcgv" <hobd...@aol.comnono> wrote in message
news:20031217162325...@mb-m06.aol.com...
> I read the thread and noticed something and had to ask-
>
> Being as how I had tested some of the first wire-nuts for approval for
the
> military (back when they were introduced and before they were widely used
in
> residential and commercial work) I was interested in knowing why most
posters
> recommended twisting the wires before they put on the wire nut.
>
> Basically, I wondered where they got that information?
> Not that it isn't proper practice nowadays to use that process with the
> various types of wire nut designs and all would pass UL. I ask out of
> curiosity because in our tests by twisting first and then applying the
nut,
> back then about half failed the capacity test, while laying straight
wires and
> turning them with the nut had no failures. In fact, the instructions were
> quite specific about NOT twisting first.
I find your information fascinating and I am sure that it is sound. I too,
would like to read the answer.
I have done both....twisted and not twisted. I can tell you tho, that
twisting is taught as "the" way to apprentices in the trade. This even
applies to stranded wire where twisting has virtually no value unless you
are cramming more conductors into the wire nut than it is rated for. Some
practices are really, really hard to change.
I have even heard threats of dismissal for anyone caught 'not' twisting
their splices together.
Greg
a ladder and you know all the wires are really in the nut. The reality is both
will work fine if done well. The old style hard wirenut still maintains the
taper but the newer soft ones will actually end up with the splice completely
wrapped in the spring. I cut a few apart last night to see what happens inside
a wirenut.
Al
hobd...@aol.comnono (Hobdbcgv) wrote:
Wow, that is very interesting. I always thought that the wire nut was
just a cap used for insulation. I always twisted the wires with a plier
and then trimmed them before I applied the wire nut. I depend on the
twisting of the wires for the connection. As far as I know, I haven't
had a failure. If I remember correctly, the wire nuts I used in the 50's
didn't even have a spiral wire insert.
Greg
>twisting of the wires for the connection. As far as I know, I haven't
>had a failure.
My house was built in 1963 and every splice was simply twisted and taped. I
have removed a lot of them in varoius renovation projects but I haven't found a
single one that showed any signs of heating, including the ones on 1440w
bathroom heaters.
Copper must be some wonderful stuff.
Harry Conover
I'm just guessing here, but given that wire nuts sometimes waork loose
and fall off, isn't it a reasonably thing to assure that the
connections are secure without the wire nut by twisting them together?
Harry C.
Hobdbcgv
>and fall off, isn't it a reasonably thing to assure that the
>connections are secure without the wire nut by twisting them together?
The procedure I tested was to finish the attachment by continuing the twist so
as to have at least a turn and a half on the insulated part of the wires -
that is, the part not under the nut was turned to get a "back-up" twist -
(That part didn't have anything to do with the contact areas, BTW)
Greg
>and fall off
If wirenuts are falling off they weren't installed properly. You are also not
supposed to reuse a wirenut.
volts500
"Greg" <gfre...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031217125634...@mb-m13.aol.com...
I disassembled a backstab device (switch) and one of the "In Sure"
connectors. The "spring steel" concept was basically the same, however, the
"In Sure" design was different enough that there's a possiblity that the
design is "improved." Like I said, only time will tell. May or may not be
another "backstab".
Harry Conover
Please define the term "installed properly" for a wirenut.
Over an extended number of years, wirenuts are VERY inclined to come
loose and fall off, unless held in place by a wrap of electrical tape.
Oxidation, temperature cycling, and vibration all contribute to this
problem.
Harry C.
SPAM>@verizon.net Nukie Poo
"Harry Conover" <hhc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7ce4e226.0312...@posting.google.com...
Which is just one example of their inferiority to the aforementioned
products.
Greg
>products.
>
I assume you are already writing your code proposals, documenting these
failures. I am curious how it will go. I will be watching for them.
SPAM>@verizon.net Nukie Poo
Code proposals for what? Are you trying say that wirenuts don't tend to fall
off or are easy to install incorrectly? If you want to use wirenuts, I don't
care to stop you. Just because something might be the defacto gold-standard
of the US industry, it does not mean it can't be improved upon. These
products are UL and CSA approved and there is no NEC article forbidding the
use of them. Evidently, you are afraid of any changes - changes for the
better. BTW, the Wago connectors have been used in din-rail applications in
many European industrial settings - even in nuclear power plants for quite
some time. The failure rate has be shown to much lower than screw-type
terminals and barrier strips. As far as the Wallnut versions go, they are
rated well above 90-degrees C and have a 600V rating (1000V for discharge
lamps). They don't vibrate loose and are less apt to be incorrectly
installed. The also carry a full 20-Ampere rating. So what's your problem?
Phil Munro
Please stop laughing! It is still a secure, efficient, and effective
way to connect copper wiring if you know how to twist, solder and tape.
The word "efficient" has to do with the space it uses in a box, not the
effort needed.
Another comment: I cannot imagine a wire nut coming loose and falling
off, unless the nut size was wrong or it was not twisted securely
enough, or perhaps pre twisting before wire nutting has something to do
with looseness. The times I have removed wire nuts have been times of
needing some real effort to get the nut loose without twisting the WIRES
backwards!
These are just the opinions of someone with less wiring experience
than many who post here. --Phil
Joel wrote:
> I have a novice question. I am wiring my basement with 12 Gauge wire
> so I can make 20 amp circuits. I have a spot where 4 No. 12 gauge
> wires come together. What is the best way to bind together 4 No. 12
> wires? Is there a wire nut big enough so I can twist them together?
> The largest I have seen is Max 3 No. 12. Is there another way I should
> use to connect them? I have tried twisting 4 scrap pieces together and
> it really is hard to get them twisted together.
--
Phil Munro Dept of Electrical & Computer Engin
mailto:PcM...@cc.ysu.edu Youngstown State University
Youngstown, Ohio 44555
Greg
problem I would like to see the case made and the problem addresed.
Hobdbcgv
FWIW - I don't put on all that many wirenuts these days (not by choosing
something else; I just don't need to join that many wires any more), but for
the past few years I have not used my fingers or a pliers - I use that free
drill thing that comes in the wire-nut box.
I hold the wires back on the insulation behind where I want the twist, jam
the straight wire ends into the nut held in the tool held in the drill, and
pull the trigger until the insulated parts between my hand and the stripped
parts under the nut have a twist in them from the drill torque.
Great little invention, btw......
Seem to hold pretty good.
( Now, I am partial to screw type wire nuts - so I don't know if it would work
on spring type nuts)
Brian
"Joel" <joe...@usinternet.com> wrote in message
news:565f796.03121...@posting.google.com...
eh...@bellatlantic.net
I have not encountered that problem. Where can we read more
about it?
Ben Miller
> loose and fall off, unless held in place by a wrap of electrical tape.
> Oxidation, temperature cycling, and vibration all contribute to this
> problem.
This has not been my experience, which is primarily in commercial and
industrial facilities. Rarely have I opened a box on a wall or ceiling and
found loose wire nuts. When I do, I can almost always identify workmanship
issues... a) wire nut never installed, b) wires stripped too short, so the
nut obviously did not "bite" properly, c) wrong size wire nut used. Most of
the time that I have seen bare splices, there are several of them hanging
out of a box with no cover on it. What does that tell you?
Yar of Grogran
No.. the single blade wiper grab of the aincient receptacles does not compare
with the WAGO wirenuts cage clamp technology!
Search google groups for "wago wire nuts" and read some user experiences. I
rewired my own residence receptacles recently and chose the Wago nuts. I
ordered the nuts from http://www.mcmaster.com/ and ordered Hubbell 5262 outlets
from MSC direct and they have been a superior winning combination!
Someone asked if they are bigger or bulky, no, they are tiny. The two position
splicer is extremely small. The 8's are a bit bigger but imagine putting 8
wires together with wire nuts.
They are UL listed for 600V and the rated ampacity of the conductors, which is
up to 12 AWG at the largest.
The biggest complaint seems to be their expense, but for homebody wiring they
are the cats nut and the monkeys meow. I guess in parts of Europe there are no
wire nuts in use. They use screw terminal strips or these Wago type cage clamp
connectors.
Regards
Yar of Grogan
p.s.
the people of planet Grogan all agree, Wago nuts are much crunchier than wire
nuts.
